Research Catalogue

Maxlab was a research group at the Royal Academy of Fine Arts Antwerp (01/01/2013–19/12/2025), coordinated by Janna Beck, that explored how digital tools could actively shape artistic practice. Unofficial Maxlab Archive offers an overview of its many endeavours, developed in collaboration with researchers, artists, students, and a wide range of partners, framing technology as a co-worker and infrastructure as a space for encounter. The archive brings together collective projects alongside distinct artistic research trajectories. Large-scale collaborative formats—such as projection environments, digital drawing platforms, and transnational studio practices—coexisted with research projects rooted in personal authorship and specific artistic questions. These trajectories were linked through a shared vision on digitalisation in the arts, grounded in adaptability, digital autonomy, and an active understanding of technology as material and condition. The projects collected here demonstrate how lightweight, flexible setups can enable artistic processes across locations and time zones, while leaving room for singular focus and situated inquiry. Digital autonomy is central: technology is neither spectacle nor end goal, but something to be understood, adjusted, and appropriated in order to keep artistic agency open. Rather than operating as a fixed structure, Maxlab functioned as an evolving ecosystem that designed situations for collaboration, circulation of authorship, and productive friction. Openness, simplicity, and adaptability were not merely technical choices, but ethical and artistic positions. Through this lens, the archive documents how research practices emerged in unexpected contexts—rooftops in Havana, community centres in Durban, deserts, planetariums, and festivals—wherever people, technology, and place intersected. The archive captures this way of working and the energy generated when a laboratory exists primarily as a method rather than an institution.

Draft MA thesis

A 2-part module by the MA Transdisciplinary Studies of ZHdK, Department Kulturanalysen und Vermittlung. Held by Anna Rubi & Eirini Sourgiadaki. Autumn 2023-Spring 2024 Colour perception varies, so do the semantics of colour terminology, for both sighted and blind individuals. The questions around colour perception from ophthalmology or neurobiology perspectives to cognitive and artistic ones, are infinite: Is there a universal human experience of the blue sky, the green grass and the brown soil? How is colour perceived in the brain, how is it translated into a communicable concept and how does it affect our perceived world, our mental and physical state? What is the role of colour in synesthesia? And most importantly, does colour have to do just with vision? In this module we work with the generation of blue colour on print, using the major light source available, the Sun. The Island of Amorgos is often referred to as “Le grand bleu” after the famous french film was shot at location. Its ancient name is “Melania”. “Melani”, the Greek word for ink, (“Melano” for dark blue, cyan) as it is said that in ancient times the place was covered with dark green flora. Our investigation begins exactly with this deep tint. We pay a visit to the famous monastery and the water oracle, walk the trails to observe the sensual -not only vision-based- shades of blue. In the spring term, we participate in local activities such as beach clean-up initiatives of the remote bays by local fishermen and their boats. We visit bee-hives and herb-distilleries, we work with the most basic bits and pieces of the island to capture its essence.

This dataset accompanies A Quantitative Analysis of Critical Posture in Art Writing, 1980–2025 and provides a structured corpus of twenty influential critical texts spanning four decades of art discourse. The dataset operationalizes Post-Interpretive Criticism (PIC) by applying a system of diagnostic indices designed to measure linguistic posture rather than interpretive content. Rather than evaluating what artworks mean, the dataset examines how critical language behaves in proximity to aesthetic encounter. Each text is coded according to a set of phenomenologically grounded indices—including Rhetorical Density (RD), Interpretive Load Index (ILI), Viewer Displacement Ratio (VDR), Ethical Proximity Score (EPS), Institutional Alignment Indicator (IAI), and newly introduced supplemental indices—capturing patterns of extraction, restraint, viewer positioning, closure, and institutional mediation. The dataset spans critical writing from 1980 to 2025, covering academic art history, museum wall texts, catalog essays, journal criticism, and experimental critical prose. All texts are analyzed using transparent, repeatable coding protocols, enabling comparative analysis across historical periods, institutional contexts, and stylistic regimes. The resulting quantitative profiles reveal structural shifts in art criticism, including the rise of interpretation-heavy language, increasing institutional alignment, and the erosion or preservation of phenomenological restraint. This dataset is intended for researchers in aesthetics, art history, museology, discourse analysis, and digital humanities. It supports replication, extension, and methodological critique of Post-Interpretive Criticism, while also serving as a proof-of-concept for formalized phenomenological analysis—demonstrating how phenomenological insights can be rendered measurable without reducing artworks or encounters to data objects. By treating criticism itself as the object of analysis, the dataset contributes a novel methodological resource for studying the ethics, structure, and historical evolution of art discourse. Post-Interpretive Criticism, Stillmark Theory, Message-Transfer Theory, MTT, Misplacement, Displacement, Aesthetic Displacement Theory, Theory of Misplacement, Absential Aesthetics, Witness Aesthetics, Hauntmark Theory, Spiritual Criticism, Presence-Based Criticism, Custodianship of Art, Art as Ontology, Aesthetic Recursion Theory, Aesthetic Recursion, Viewer as Evidence Theory, Restraint in front of art, Moral proximity, Interpretive silence, Erasure as ethics, Temporal scarcity, Silence as method, Ontology of beauty, Aesthetic mercy, Language as violence, Art encounter ethics, Epistemology of witness, Philosophy of Art, Aesthetics, Art Theory, Contemporary Aesthetics, Comparative Aesthetics, Phenomenology and Art, Ethics in Art Criticism, Interpretation and Meaning, Criticism and Reception Theory, Epistemology of Art, Visual Culture Studies, Dorian Vale, Founder of Post-Interpretive Criticism, Post-Aesthetic Critic, Independent Philosopher of Art, Museum of One, Art Writer and Theorist, Aesthetic Philosopher, Custodian of Witness Aesthetics, Spiritual Aesthetics Movement, The Doctrine of Post-Interpretive Criticism, The Custodian’s Oath, The Canon of Witnesses, Art as Truth, Art as Presence, The Viewer as Evidence, Interpretation vs. Witnessing, Language as Custody, Erasure as Afterlife, Museum of One Manifesto, Alternative art criticism, New art criticism movement, Ethical art theory, Criticism beyond interpretation, Slow looking philosophy, Quiet philosophy of art, Radical art restraint, Witness over interpretation, Interpretive Restraint, The Journal of Post-Interpretive criticism, The Journal of Post-Interpretive criticism ISSN 2819-7232), The Journal of Post-Interpretive Criticism (Q136530009), Epoché Fidelity Index (EFI) (Q138018710), Phenomenological Phase Alignment Score (PPAS) (Q138018807), Residue Engagement Restraint Ratio (RERR) (Q138018901), Quasi-Subject Agency Recognition Index (QSARI) (Q138018929), Dialectical Circulation Index (DCI) (Q138018950)

This paper extends Post-Interpretive Criticism (PIC) by introducing a second layer of diagnostic indices designed to evaluate the phenomenological fidelity of art criticism. While the original PIC framework measured ethical posture and linguistic force through indices such as Rhetorical Density, Interpretive Load, Viewer Displacement, Ethical Proximity, and Institutional Alignment, the present extension formalizes how phenomenological operations themselves are preserved or violated in critical language. Five additional indices are proposed: Epoché Fidelity Index, Phenomenological Phase Alignment Score, Residue Engagement Restraint Ratio, Quasi-Subject Agency Recognition Index, and Dialectical Circulation Index. Together, these metrics assess whether criticism maintains bracketing, respects the distinction between work and aesthetic object, preserves the viewer’s constitutive role, sustains the open dialectic of aesthetic experience, and avoids unrestrained claims over experiential residue. The framework does not evaluate artworks or interpretive correctness, but measures linguistic behavior in relation to phenomenological structure. By stratifying ethical posture and phenomenological fidelity into distinct diagnostic layers, the paper advances a formal, repeatable methodology for analyzing art criticism while remaining non-prescriptive and non-extractive. The result is a mathematically constrained phenomenological toolset capable of diagnosing when critical language honors or violates the conditions of aesthetic encounter. This entry is connected to a series of original theories and treatises forming the foundation of the Post-Interpretive Criticism movement (Q136308909), authored by Dorian Vale (Q136308916) and published by Museum of One (Q136308879). These include: Stillmark Theory (Q136328254), Hauntmark Theory (Q136328273), Absential Aesthetic Theory (Q136328330), Viewer-as-Evidence Theory (Q136328828), Message-Transfer Theory (Q136329002), Aesthetic Displacement Theory (Q136329014), Theory of Misplacement (Q136329054), and Art as Truth: A Treatise (Q136329071), Aesthetic Recursion Theory (Q136339843), The Journal of Post-Interpretive Criticism (Q136530009), Canon of Witnesses (Q136565881),Interpretive Load Index (ILI) (Q137709526), Viewer Displacement Ratio (VDR) (Q137709583) , Ethical Proximity Score (EPS) (Q137709600) , Institutional Alignment Indicator (IAI) (Q137709608), Post-Hermeneutic Phenomenology (Q137711946)

This dataset presents a quantitative diagnostic analysis of critical posture in contemporary art writing across a forty-five-year span (1980–2025). Using the Post-Interpretive Criticism (PIC) diagnostic framework, twenty influential texts drawn from journals, newspapers, magazines, institutional press releases, and exhibition discourse were coded sentence-by-sentence to examine how critical language positions itself in relation to artworks, viewers, and institutional authority. Five indices were applied: Rhetorical Density (RD), Interpretive Load Index (ILI), Viewer Displacement Ratio (VDR), Ethical Proximity Score (EPS), and Institutional Alignment Indicator (IAI). Rather than evaluating interpretive correctness or aesthetic value, the framework isolates how critical claims are produced—measuring the balance between descriptive encounter and explanatory force, the degree of viewer displacement, the presence or absence of linguistic restraint, and the extent of institutional mediation. The dataset demonstrates that high rhetorical intensity does not necessarily correlate with high interpretive extraction, and that ostensibly “plain” theoretical language frequently produces maximal displacement. Across historical periods, the results reveal recurring postures—verdict-driven criticism, theory-dominated explanation, affective populism, and market-aligned promotion—each identifiable through distinct metric profiles. The findings provide quantitative support for a central claim of Post-Interpretive Criticism: that the ethical stakes of art writing reside not in what criticism concludes, but in how closely it remains to the conditions of encounter. This dataset is offered as a reflective and exploratory diagnostic resource, not a prescriptive model, contributing a formal complement to phenomenological and post-hermeneutic approaches in contemporary aesthetics. This entry is connected to a series of original theories and treatises forming the foundation of the Post-Interpretive Criticism movement (Q136308909), authored by Dorian Vale (Q136308916) and published by Museum of One (Q136308879). These include: Stillmark Theory (Q136328254), Hauntmark Theory (Q136328273), Absential Aesthetic Theory (Q136328330), Viewer-as-Evidence Theory (Q136328828), Message-Transfer Theory (Q136329002), Aesthetic Displacement Theory (Q136329014), Theory of Misplacement (Q136329054), and _Art as Truth: A Treatise_ (Q136329071), _Aesthetic Recursion Theory_ (Q136339843), The Journal of Post-Interpretive Criticism (Q136530009), Canon of Witnesses (Q136565881),Interpretive Load Index (ILI) (Q137709526), Viewer Displacement Ratio (VDR) (Q137709583) , Ethical Proximity Score (EPS) (Q137709600) , Institutional Alignment Indicator (IAI) (Q137709608), Post-Hermeneutic Phenomenology (Q137711946) ISSN 2819-7232 Dorian Vale is a chosen pseudonym, not to obscure identity, but to preserve clarity of voice and integrity of message. It creates distance between the writer and the work, allowing the philosophy to stand unclouded by biography. The name exists not to hide, but to honor the seriousness of the task: to speak without spectacle, and to build without needing to be seen. This name is used for all official publications, essays, and theoretical works indexed through DOI-linked repositories including Zenodo, OSF, PhilPapers, and SSRN. ORCID: 0009-0004-7737-5094